hdhuegau6hfhd

why do they insist on using average where median would be much more useful way to measure this ( lower extremes impact )?

The issue is no reliable data can easily be found ( closest for me was this -https://www.statista.com/statistics/183505/number-of-vehicle... ) suggesting that neither of us actually knows. Sounds to me like a bad reason to base an argument( or policy on ).

- I know that most people I'm aware of all drive their car by themselves to their work, there was very little carpooling.

how many of those are suvs? and then we go bk to use case. there is a reason soccer moms exist. u focus on work commute and likely on metro areas only but fail to account for other activity types

- My wife and I drive EVs that we get in, press a button, and it starts, similar to our previous ICE vehicles.

Sure but 1. how much was you upfront cost for either 2. how big is ur family 3. daily commute distance 4. use case

- Just look at the infrastructure 5 years ago and extrapolate where it will be going. Walmart, a staple of the poor, has announced plans to expand its EV charging footprint.

so it is a little like wishful thinking. you may end up being right. you might not, but u r willing to gamble a little

all those things matter when u argue 'everyone should be like me'

is it suvs commuting to work or all types, because you mught be cherry picking your stats if you present avg occupancy for all cars in us as an argument here

what about the bike owner? does their safety matter? it is really not all about you.

And presumably those same people will charge it.. where? where is infrastructure and please dont say presumably

-Most poor don't buy new, and if they do, there are vehicles like the Bolt that are cheaper than your typical new SUV

on avg. poor people buy cheap, because it is what they can afford. iirc, bolt is not as available as it used to be. plus, even after incentives evs are not cheap

- Presumably the market will respond with options, similar to how in 2008 the poor couldn't afford smartphone

great. we will throw away working system for presumably great system. presumably, the poor will get to drive a golf cart ewuivalent that requires iris and palm scan for 'helping improve customer experience'

-along with eliminating costs for 2-3 oil changes every year.

yeah.. because its the oil change that is killing me and not thousands for new battery

Statistically unlikely given that SUV carries more people, which translates into higher moron encounter chance since more morons are now forced onto other mode of transport. You just increased your odds.

As for seriously, have you ever seen a bike accident?

But won't those morons just be replaced by morons on bikes, scooters and bicycles? Is that actually better for end user?

Fill is an interesting verb. I suppose you could try to tetris it up each trip to the store, but unpacking would just as inconvenient as packing. That said, if you buy a weeksworth of food for 3 kids, sedan may easily overflow.

Eh. And who will suffer? Poor people. Why? 'Drive a bus', that is why is the gist of reasoning here. Naturally, upper income and wealthy individuals will still drive crazy toys, but that is ok.

I so wish that to be true, but if Ukraine proved anything, it is exactly that might is right is alive is well ( for example, Germany only buckled after nordstream blew up or India just saying no to US restrictions on gas purchases ).

I can't speak for parent, but there is a point at which I just stop caring. Either thinga will get bad enough and people will revolt like they tend to do when its too late or they won't. Nihilism is one hell of a drug.

Separately, on a personal level, I find social justice annoying.

But then I have coffee and play with my kid and no longer wish to destroy the world.

Duality of man in a nutshell.